You're confusing what the subject of a franchise is; therefore, you're misidentifying its origin.

Heh. Ok, if Toy Story is Buzz Lightyear's origin, and Avatar is the origin of Avatars (did you watch the movie??), then yeah I'm most definitely confused as can be.

Quote:

You can always keep going back in time and say its the origin of one thing or another.

Yes, something always precedes another. Still has nothing to do with the initial contention that properties can flourish without devoting half its running start to slowly explain the genesis of characters.

Of course a WW origin could be great. And I wouldn't highly object to it. But there's this prevailing notion it has to start at her beginning...or else (?).

Anyway this argument is moot as I'm being vindicated as we speak. By the time Diana gets her solo film, it'll be her third cinematic appearance. Nothing left to be said there.

I think the origin is going to like the Justice League animated series. She notices something going wrong in the outside world in this case Zod or Superman as goes to check it out. Then a flashback montage like the opening of Incredible Hulk or Old Spock and Kirk's mind meld in the new Star Trek. The audience knows enough about her as it is. While they may not know her mother or Steve Trevor they do know that she is somehow related to Greek gods and is from an island of Amazons.

Look at Batman Begins. Yes it's an origin film but most of the actual origins take place in flashbacks. Same with Man of Steel. They become Batman and Superman in the main narrative. I'm betting Diana becoming Wonder Woman is part of the main narrative in BVS. This film will most likely be her year one.

Personally, I sure hope not. At least not a traditional origin film. Wonder Woman would have already appeared in BvS: DoJ and Justice League by that point. Wonder Woman's character would have already been established and the basics of her origin developed to the extent possible.

That typed, I would prefer to see Wonder Woman's solo film rooted firmly in her mythology to expand her character as a whole, not just her "origin". A movie where Wonder Woman is almost solely based on Themyscira and dealing with threats from her own mythology (e.g. Greek gods or monsters) would be my preference. They could touch upon any elements of her origin which haven't already been established at that point in time or as required to serve the purposes of the story (e.g. if Ares training Diana as a child were somehow relevant to the plot, then it could be raised).

People forget that there are all sorts of ways to tell origin stories. Batman Begins jumped of few years at a time up to the present. MOS used flashbacks. Captain America was all in the past. Iron Man was all in the present.

Until I actually see the film or read reviews and see trailers, I am of the mind that we aren't going to get much in the way of "origin" for Diana in BvS or JL, so by default a solo film with her is needed to flesh her out more, especially if WB is looking at her as a character to exploit for a multi film franchise of her own.

__________________My father. 1946-2014

He truly proved that every person has the potential to be a force for good in this life. So anyone that reads this, do me a favor... Call your parents.

^Indeed. A story that spans from pre-history, to ancient Greece, to the modern day, covering war, revenge, forgiveness, motherhood, gods, the hero's journey and the cause of peace and love over hatred. It could be epic. But the suits have to deliver on the script, funding and talent behind the cameras.

PS, AGAIN... All other creators are just swimming in Perez's wake on the character no matter what new wrinkle they come up with. In some ways George has been the equal of Marston when it comes to WW. He defined her for the post 1987 audience and every one follows the path he's trailed in making Diana and her mythos work in the modern world of comic book characters.

__________________My father. 1946-2014

He truly proved that every person has the potential to be a force for good in this life. So anyone that reads this, do me a favor... Call your parents.

Yup, it is moot because origin movies are usually made and they earn money.

It already isn't starting at her beginning because she'll be in BvS and JL, so where is this "prevailing notion it has to start at her beginning"? Don't know why you were arguing about this all along.

We're talking about her first solo movie that will come after 2 appearances.

There were several claims that origin is necessary because we needed to get to know her. Or that she wasn't enough of an established character to be afforded the luxury of simply telling a story.

Considering she will in likelihood have already appeared twice before there is even a possibility of an origin driven story, what does it say about those appearances? Are people going to be complaining BvS and JL didn't do her justice?

Quote:

Originally Posted by KRYPTON INC.

^Indeed. A story that spans from pre-history, to ancient Greece, to the modern day, covering war, revenge, forgiveness, motherhood, gods, the hero's journey and the cause of peace and love over hatred. It could be epic. But the suits have to deliver on the script, funding and talent behind the cameras.

I'm semi-hopeful as WW will be made in an era where Hunger Games and Gravity have established the success of female solo films. Otherwise I'd be very nervous.

Everything hinges on the director, because for me it's the overall vision that will need to be unique in order to successfully bring Diana to the big screen. If they only get competent writers, producers, and a director, I wouldn't be convinced they're not making something more than just a female superhero movie.

Considering she will in likelihood have already appeared twice before there is even a possibility of an origin driven story, what does it say about those appearances? Are people going to be complaining BvS and JL didn't do her justice?

Of course, because she has a rich mythos and there's more to the character.

Many people want a Black Widow or Hulk solo movie for the same reason. It's completely understandable.

Of course, because she has a rich mythos and there's more to the character.

Many people want a Black Widow or Hulk solo movie for the same reason. It's completely understandable.

Right, but none of that hinges on an origin story. Her character has several adventures to go through, all of which have equal possibility of being great.

I'm not advocating a complete sidestep of her background. A few scenes here and there, if it's relevant to the bigger picture. I'm just not a fan of devoting two acts to pure set-up. I think it's a waste.

Right, but none of that hinges on an origin story. Her character has several adventures to go through, all of which have equal possibility of being great.

I'm not advocating a complete sidestep of her background. A few scenes here and there, if it's relevant to the bigger picture. I'm just not a fan of devoting two acts to pure set-up. I think it's a waste.

If it's an origin movie, it wouldn't be set-up. It would be what the movie is about. How much do you know about Diana's beginnings? Sounds like you could benefit learning about it.

Her origin would cover the introduction of magic, gods, Themyscira and the Amazons, her costume and weapons, and key supporting casts. You may not be interested in learning about the character's mythos but the whole point of a solo movie is to devote more attention to one character. That's why origin movies are optimal to start with because it's about who they are rather than fighting whatever villain.

If it's an origin movie, it wouldn't be set-up. It would be what the movie is about. How much do you know about Diana's beginnings? Sounds like you could benefit learning about it.

You misunderstand. My issue is with origin movies tending to tell two different narratives. Typically the first two acts are devoted to telling the character's origin. The final act is a forced action set-piece which includes the villain and saving the day. 99% of origin movies suffer for this and I hate it every time. Even Batman Begins and the original Donner film suffered from this. It has never failed to feel like two separate movies in one package.

Quote:

Her origin would cover the introduction of magic, gods, Themyscira and the Amazons, her costume and weapons, and key supporting casts. You may not be interested in learning about the character's mythos but the whole point of a solo movie is to devote more attention to one character. That's why origin movies are optimal to start with because it's about who they are rather than fighting whatever villain.

That's my problem. No matter how much time is spent developing the character, ultimately the film is always going to switch paces by introducing a threat only the hero can save and end in some grand battle scene with their arch-nemesis. It's disjointed and I've never seen an origin story successfully make that transition.

The only origin film I've admired is Unbreakable. That is literally all origin. Start to finish. But I understand it's structure is not befitting for a blockbuster budget, so I'm not too peeved about it.

If the writers can somehow weave the threat naturally along with Diana's development, I'd be all for it. I just think it's unlikely.

You misunderstand. My issue is with origin movies tending to tell two different narratives. Typically the first two acts are devoted to telling the character's origin. The final act is a forced action set-piece which includes the villain and saving the day. 99% of origin movies suffer for this and I hate it every time. Even Batman Begins and the original Donner film suffered from this. It has never failed to feel like two separate movies in one package.

That's my problem. No matter how much time is spent developing the character, ultimately the film is always going to switch paces by introducing a threat only the hero can save and end in some grand battle scene with their arch-nemesis. It's disjointed and I've never seen an origin story successfully make that transition.

The only origin film I've admired is Unbreakable. That is literally all origin. Start to finish. But I understand it's structure is not befitting for a blockbuster budget, so I'm not too peeved about it.

If the writers can somehow weave the threat naturally along with Diana's development, I'd be all for it. I just think it's unlikely.

If that's the only origin movie you admire, then it basically boils down to what you like which is fine. The majority of viewers don't share the same categorical distaste for origin movies. So, that's not really an argument against making them. You need to consider audiences other than yourself.

If that's the only origin movie you admire, then it basically boils down to what you like which is fine. The majority of viewers don't share the same categorical distaste for origin movies. So, that's not really an argument against making them. You need to consider audiences other than yourself.

I don't need to, because I've got zero say in how these films are made. None of us do. Which is why when we post our opinions here, it has always been reliant on our own personal taste.

When was the last time anyone here was speaking on the behalf of general audiences?

I don't need to, because I've got zero say in how these films are made. None of us do. Which is why when we post our opinions here, it has always been reliant on our own personal taste.

When was the last time anyone here was speaking on the behalf of general audiences?

That's not entirely true. The market speaks. The more people pay to watch a movie, the industry will create similar movies to meet those demands. So, we do influence what kind of movies get made. Not all filmmakers have a deaf ear either. Snyder and Goyer both responded to criticisms against MOS and fans have influenced movies before.

Not all discussions boil down to taste. Anytime someone brings up consensus ratings or sales they're speaking on behalf of the GA. You can argue the merits of something without resorting to taste.

That's not entirely true. The market speaks. The more people pay to watch a movie, the industry will create similar movies to meet those demands. So, we do influence what kind of movies get made. Not all filmmakers have a deaf ear either. Snyder and Goyer both responded to criticisms against MOS and fans have influenced movies before.

But in that sense we are making change by voicing our personal opinions which happen to coincide, creating a larger voice and (potentially) affecting production. That's different from expressing our desires for a movie based on the status quo.

Quote:

Not all discussions boil down to taste. Anytime someone brings up consensus ratings or sales they're speaking on behalf of the GA. You can argue the merits of something without resorting to taste.

Well those are facts and numbers. Anyone would be foolish to interject their own feelings with hard facts.